Tata Interactive Systems

Write Better

Nandini Bandopadhyay and Sarbani Mukherjee, Senior Specialists – Instructional Design at Tata Interactive Systems write in their response to the Learning Circuits Blog’s Big Question for April: What would you like to do better as a Learning Professional? 

Write. Seems an odd answer, considering this is what we do for a living! Yet writing interesting instructional content still seems to be a challenging task. So we wish we could write better.

It’s a big responsibility us learning professionals have — to use words to teach the most complex of content to someone sitting thousands of miles away. The big questions, thus, never seem to go away — Is my writing good enough? Will my writing improve the learner’s online experience?

But there’s technology and there are graphics, some of you may say. Text is not the only medium of instruction. While that’s a fair argument, what one can’t deny is the power of effective writing. Not dumbing down the content to suit the audience, but redefining style for a greater good.

So what do we mean by ‘better writing?’ Using words effectively, learning the art of presentation, striking a balance between substance and style, and saying more in fewer words. But hang on! That’s not all. There’s the all-important task of making the learner ask for more. Of making him (or her) curious about all things mundane. Think this can’t be done? Read on…

Think about school days. (OK! We accept that’s a whole lot of years ago…) Those history lessons, lines from King Lear, or inventions that changed our lives forever… We remember these because some of our teachers were great storytellers. Their anecdotes brought to life the dark ant-like letters in the textbooks. They unleashed the power of imagination.

To reach across to the other side, we need to do just that. Look for a twist in the tale to keep the interest alive. And we need to mind the gap. Which brings us back to where we started. Our desire to write better. To tell good tales where the content allows, to create good scenarios to make drab content come to life, to use words to do what we set out to do… teach. At the end of the day, isn’t that what this is all about?

What Would I Like To Do Better As A Learning Professional?

(Preeti Jasnani, Deputy Head – Instructional Design with TATA Interactive Systems reflects on the Learning Circuits Blog’s Big Question for April.)

I could start making a genuine attempt to adopt a simple and what experts call a ‘no-nonsense’ approach to learning, and thereby design.

As an e-learning professional, most of my work caters to adult learners. And we adults don’t like to waste time; at least we’d like to believe so!

Each time I get down to designing a new course, I focus on ensuring sound instructional design that would work for the said target audience and the said subject matter. I think in terms of scenarios, stories, simulations, and games and make every attempt to come up with a new, ‘out-of-the box’ strategy to create a learning environment that is fairly interactive and engaging for my learner. Holy intentions indeed!

Then, why does each course I build almost always leave behind the lingering question:

Do the learners really need all the information and interactivity that has been plugged in or is the learner being held hostage by the course?

I must confess I’m afraid to hear the answer. That brings me back to the big question: What could I do better as a learning professional? I sure could start building courses that don’t waste my learner’s time.

And how can I do this? 

It’s all about focus, I reckon. About understanding the real purpose of the course and defining definite objectives, thus avoiding information overload. About adopting a ‘no-nonsense’ approach with which I can decide which course needs to be interactive and engaging and which other could be a simple ‘click and read.’ About realizing that each course need not really be a course!

Chicken Soup for the Mind

(Priya Thiyagarajan, Deputy Head – Instructional Design with TATA Interactive Systems takes a pot at the Learning Circuits Blog’s Big Question for March 2008.)

My peer group is an organic encyclopedia. I sometimes fancy that among us, we’ll have the answers to most of the questions in the world—from the meaning of “hemi demisemiquaver” to the benefits of proportional representation in a democracy to the nuances of RFID implementation.

That’s because we are the Facebook-ing, Youtube-ing, Wiki-ing, blog-ing knowledge-age kids on the block. We are in the driver seats of those earthmovers that are busy flattening the world. Information is our faith and fodder.

Our intellectual biceps may be well developed, but it is debatable whether that makes us faster or more competent workers. Most of our knowledge is context-less, so many bits of data, pushed to us by a ubiquitous and aggressive web of new-age technology.

This is just the tip of the crisis iceberg. IDC reports that the amount of information created, captured, and replicated in the digital universe in 2007 was 281 exabytes (or 281 billion gigabytes), outstripping the knowledge created by all the books ever written by a few million times, its gargantuan appetite swallowing all the existing storage options. And it is only going to get worse. In 2011, there will be nearly 1,800 exabytes of information created.

Whither this information? What is the sane way of cataloguing, prioritizing, and processing this? How can this stupendous amount of data be distilled into something that can be useful and beneficial to us?

More importantly, are we left to fend for ourselves in this binary jungle?

IT service providers are definitely part of the rescue team, with their powerful, context-sensitive, and intuitive decision support tools that makes sense of this data. But what about enterprise support functions such as Learning & Development and Knowledge Management? Where do they stand?

Compliance Training: Key Challenges

Regulatory and compliance training has always been a thorn in the flesh of training managers. There are the regulatory authorities to satisfy as they want records of training completion; there are the reporting managers to reckon with because they don’t want their wards to be off their workplace for too long; there are the learners to manage, because they don’t particularly find the content interesting. Then there is the business end of it – how do you ensure that compliance training leads to compliance, and how does that lead to an improvement in organizational performance? Answers have been sought, with limited success. Little wonder then that compliance training has been long on rhetoric and short on transformational approaches. Here are five key challenges in developing e-learning courses in compliance training.

Evil Tools or Evil Uses?

I've noticed a slowly growing trend in the marketplace, and I think it's time it's questioned.

It has become quite in vogue to bad-mouth and shun the use of Powerpoint in presentations.

I was first exposed to this stance in a presentation by Edward Tufte (author of several fantastic books on information visualization and communication).  He made a mark for himself by declaring that "Powerpoint is Evil", both in a WIRED article and in a longer whitepaper.

More recently, Elliot Masie dubbed his newly minted "Learning 200X" conferences to be "PPT-free Zones", instructing presenters to leave their slides at home in hopes that it would foster greater discussion and interaction amongst attendees (and this underlying objective may have been accomplished, as the sessions *did* move from being lectures to conversations).

Just last week I spent a terrific day in Washington DC talking about Stories and Conversations at an event hosted by the Smithsonian Associates.  One of the great speakers that presented was Larry Prusak of IBM KM fame.  I really enjoyed his talk, which was PPT-free, but instead of simply quietly adopting that presentation stance and moving ahead, he made a pointed announcement of his disdain of Powerpoint.  He even went so far as to say that he uninstalled the app from the MS Office Suite on his computer.

Finally (and completely serendipitously), this month's 'Big Question' on the Learning Curcuits Blog is precisely on this topic - the What/When/Why of PPT.  The BQ seems to have been prompted by an Austrailian press article that uses Dr. John Sweller's Cognitive Load Theory to explain why most PPTs are so head-droppingly awful (and the link makes terrific sense to me).

In all of these cases (and the dozens I haven't mentioned, some of which are here), I can't help but think that the primary flag-wavers of the Anti-Powerpoint movement are projecting their disgust and anger in the wrong direction.  Powerpoint is simply a tool, like a hammer, or a lawnmower.  In and of itself, it's not really something that can be deemed "evil".  It is the way the tool is leveraged that gives it "value" (good or bad).

Don't get me wrong - I've been the victim (and... umm... the perpetrator) of more than a few AWFUL powerpoint presentations.  You know the ones - where the audience is given a live (often monotone) narration of (text-laden) slides that are linearly displayed.  I am in no way defending this embarrassment of communication - I'm simply pointing out that the fault sits with the *presenter*, not the tool (despite the fact that the tool may make it easy for the lazy to use it in bone-headed ways).

Just because a hammer can be used to both frame a house for the victims of a natural disaster and murder someone, that doesn't make it inherently "evil" or "good".  Those value-laden terms can only be reasonably used to describe the users of the tool based on what they chose to do with it.  When Larry said he had removed Powerpoint from his computer, for its nature of promoting one-way communication, I wanted to ask him if he had also removed Word?  According to the logic of his argument for uninstalling Powerpoint, any word processor should also be shunned - after all, documents are monologues, not dialogs, right?

Shift Happens

Scott McLeod, of the Univ of Minnesota, recently reworrked and posted a version of a presentation that Karl Fisch created called "Did You Know?".  It's really quite good on several different levels (globalization, learning, change, the future) and is worth a view (~6 mins). 

Several of the themes resonated especially loudly for me, being an eLearning specialist working for an Indian firm, as well as being the (proud) father of a six year old boy.  The world we are living within TODAY is amazing and changing incredibly fast, but it all (may) look like "the good old days" to my son in the same way that today's workforce reflects upon how things were, not in the 1930's, but in the 1830's (or maybe the 1730's!).

The current day statistics and facts he cites are pretty amazing (or scary, depending on your risk profile and comfort with change).  And although it's always dangerous business predicting the future (as witnessed by Charles Duell's prediction, as Commissioner of US Patent Office in 1899, that "Everything that can be invented has been invented."), even if only a portion of the forecasts in the latter portion of the presentation are just partially true, we STILL will be in for a wild ride...

(It seems like some of those predictions may have been based on Ray Kurzweil's research on "The Singularity", and how exponential change is powerful but subtle before you hit the "knee of the curve", where change becomes noticable (which is where he claims we all sit currently).  He says that we'll experience a century's worth of progress in the next 25 calendar years, and 20,000 years of progress(!) in the next 100 calendar years.  Hold on tight...)

So what's the relation to Learning and Development?  The scent of it abounds, even if it's not explicitly stated.  We must prepare to live/survive/excel in a world that will be changing more rapidly than ever.  And in a world of change, it is the person who has learned how to learn who will have the advantage.  We need to stop focusing on teaching fact/figures/answers, and begin to embrace the ability to analyze/sythesize/adapt.  Good teaching and learning strategies will be at the core of success tomorrow, regardless of the details of what that vista ends up looking like.

In a time of drastic change, it is the learners who inherit the future.  The learned find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists.
-- Eric Hoffer

(UPDATE: June 25, 2007)

Since Karl and Scott originally published this thought-provoking stack, a fair amount of momentum and interest has developed.  While some focused on reworking the orginal material with new graphics and slightly updated content (one was quite succesful, having won in two categories of Slideshow's 'World's Best Presentation Contest"),  the original authors (with some help from Xplane) have been busy themselves...  They just released an updated version: Did You Know 2.0.  Check it out...

(Jon Revelos is Director - Story Based Learning at TATA Interactive Systems)

LCB March 2007: What Would You Do to Support New Managers?

This month’s Big Question at The Learning Circuits Blog is “What Would You Do to Support New Managers?” I ask: What is it that you would like from your new managers?

Are there some improvements you would like to see in the way things are managed in your company? What management skills are critical for your organization’s success? These and perhaps other related questions must be asked before a strategy is worked out to fulfill a new manager’s coaching needs.

And this brings me to my point that coaching – more than the medium or the narrow view of ‘training’ – is an indispensable instrument in preparing your new managers to respond to the big challenges you’ve set up for them.

You’ve probably realized that the one-time individual “doer” has now transitioned to the role of an “influencer”, who will shape the productivity and success of large teams. Are there good examples and best practices that your new managers can follow to start delivering the goods from Day One? Here’s a list of what I’ve found useful:

1. Institute a ‘Buddy’ system: At the point of transitioning into managerial roles, can you get respected senior managers to buddy your new managers to educate and develop them? Make use of the mentors’ experience to create a culture of success, and personalized ‘care’.
   
2. Get them to flock together: Often new managers feel like they’re operating in isolation. Helping new managers to learn from each other and developing an environment of peer support goes a long way in addressing concerns that would otherwise have to wait for formal training to come by.
   
3. Encourage inter-departmental flocking: Getting to know how other departments in the organization function, what they do, their staff, etc. helps build a shared vision and the much-touted big picture.
   
4. Promote experiential learning: Get your managers to feedback to the system of the outcomes of experiential learning, e.g. key learning points from a major screw up, a client save, a major deal. What did the team do or not do to become successful? These need to become inspirational corporate stories that people – new managers or not – would like to know or read about.

This is just a start. With strategic objectives clearly in focus, and the tools to deliver coaching in the classroom, on the Web, or face-to-face, you will only increase the likelihood of success with a team of high-performing managers.

(Rohan Kohli is Senior Consultant, Instructional Design)

Innovation, Failure, and Learning

CNBC has started a new 5-part series on Innovation called, "The Business of Innovation".

The first episode ("Innovators and Iconoclasts") has already aired, but is available online here.  It's really quite good, with interviews with many well respected figures from the business and innovation arena.  Well worth the time to watch the 4 segments...

So what does this have to do with learning?

Although the series is hosted by Maria Bartiromo, she is assisted by Roger Schank, well-known educational provoker and Artifical Intelligence/Cognitive Science expert.  From my perspective, he steals the show (full disclosure: I studied under Schank at Northwestern's Institute for the Learning Sciences).

Consider these snippets from the episode's opening:

• Innovators don't really fit in very well (with others)
• Nearly everyone starts out as an Iconoclast (a rule breaker) - little kids don't know the rules; they do what they want to do.
• Failure is KEY!  You have to be failing and failing again.
• Big companies are always trying to hire people who were in the top 10% at Harvard, under the assumption that they are good.  What Harvard graduates are good at is... Harvard.
• You want someone original from Harvard?  Try the BOTTOM 10%.  Those kids are smart enough to get it, then decided they weren't playin' the game.

BINGO!

The connection here (among others) is that we need to be willing to experiment and fail in order to break the mold of "what everyone else is doing" or "how it's always been done".  If we aren't willing to reach out beyond what's known and assured, then we'll just get more of what we've got.

Failure has such an unfairly bad rep - companies (generally) hate it, employees (mostly) avoid it, recruiters rarely ask about it.  Yet it's the home zip code of where learning occurs.  If you do something and succeed, all that tells you is that what you already know works - it provides confirmation, but no growth/learning. 

The primary time real learning occurs is when we do X, expecting Y, and Z occurs instead. 

BOOM! 

Discomfort and surprise result!  Motivation to find out what the hell happened arises!  A new case for your storehouse of experiences is added to your wetware!  And a few new synapses are connected! - Learning has occurred!

It's exactly this kind of semi-contrarian stance that has made Roger who he is.  Love him or hate him, it's tough to ignore him and the points he makes.

Do yourself a favor and do a quick Google on "Roger Schank" and read what he's written/said, as well as the responses he's generated (pro AND con).  I guarantee you will find yourself shifting in your seat and thinking more deeply about some "common/accepted knowledge" than you probably have recently.

Here are a few to get you started:

• His blog on District Administrator, an online magazine for K-12 Education Leaders
• His (occasional) Educational Outrage column
• His Student Bill of Rights
• His Maxims for Learning

(Jon Revelos is Director - Story Based Learning at TATA Interactive Systems)

What Questions Should We Be Asking?

We got two of our senior designers, Chandra Shekhar Ghildiyal (Graphics/Games) and Anne Roy (ID), to discuss the Big Question for February. Their original idea was to come up with a list of intelligent questions. But during the discussion, they were drawn into some fundamental issues.

What do you do before asking a question?
Do you think of the implications of asking that question? This is especially important if the question is asked during a face-to-face meeting or in informal conversation. You usually get more time to word a document carefully.

Have you ever wished you could take a question back?

Do you always preempt the answer? Blurting out a question without thinking it through is almost always a mistake. Tailor your question so that you get an answer that is specific and meets your purpose.

Do you attempt to find the appropriate person to question? Do you try to get an insight into that individual?

Do you check that your questions are appropriate for the culture and the situation?

Why are you asking the question?
Identify your motives. Do you want to indicate that you are processing information? Are you asking questions to be noticed?

Are you trying to direct the questioning to the answer that you want? This kind of questioning works in presentations and training programs. A question may activate a new line of thought or may lead to thinking out of the box just like this month’s Big Question.

Why are you not asking questions?
Asking questions displays curiosity and an eagerness to learn. It’s a cliché that if you are not asking questions, you are not learning. Then why is it that sometimes you don’t ask questions?
Are you trying to avoid the limelight? Are you afraid of expressing your ignorance? Or is it because you don’t expect to get any answers?

Is the environment at your workplace conducive to asking questions?
Should you be concerned if you work in a place where people don’t actively question the status quo? Should you be disturbed if no one asks you questions? Does that mean you don’t answer questions consistently? Or that you are not accessible? Or that you answer questions with motherhood statements? Or that you are known not to take action? Should you actively increase your availability and accessibility?

You can't set up a question a day or provide a list of questions to ask; you need to create an atmosphere where asking questions is encouraged. Maybe then more of the questions posed will be the ones we should be asking.